Exploring the Critical Question of Which Method in Education Policy Research in the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago: Choosing From Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods?

• In Event: Educational Research in Less Resourced Communities: Exploring Perspectives

Abstract

Purpose of the study
This study analyses three mixed methods policy studies conducted between 2007 and 2010 focusing upon the issue of the appropriateness of methods. The quantitative and qualitative components addressed the following policy issues (1) secondary school choice, (2) schools facing exceptional challenge, and (3) the status of continuous assessment in the primary schools of Trinidad and Tobago. The central research questions were:
1) How do families make secondary school choices and what are the common choice
patterns and consequences for selected groups?
2) What is the nature of education practice in schools facing challenging circumstances?
3) What is the status of the continuous assessment practice in Trinidad and Tobago?

Theoretical Framework
Mixed methods designs provide a useful alternative to monomethod policy research studies. Firstly, this type of research is true to Crossley’s (2008) cautious desire for multiple paradigmatic perspectives. Secondly, the various mixed methods research designs allows different emphases and timing for the qualitative or quantitative components. Thirdly, the process of creating integrated inferences (meta-inferences) is valuable not only because the integrated inference better captures the combined findings, but also the process can make clear instances of dissonance leading to new and nuanced insights. Finally, indigenous methods and research should not be restricted solely to approaches situated in single paradigmatic families.

Methods of Inquiry and Data Sources
The study is a review of three policy studies focusing upon critical issues. The study made use of a concurrent multilevel mm design with full cohorts selected from the years 1995 to 2005 for the quantitative component. A stratified purposive sample of 8 sites from 6 educational districts was used for the qualitative component. The challenging school study employed a sequential explanatory mixed methods design with full cohort data selected from national tests for 2005 to 2007 for the quantitative component. For the qualitative component, a purposive sample of three sites for the case study. The continuous assessment study used an iterative multiphase mm design with 11 sites in the first qualitative phase, 425 teachers at 36 sites, and 2 sites in the final qualitative phase.

Major Findings
The evidence from the three policy studies suggests that place and space do have significant impact on policy outcomes in small states. To illustrate, location was a significant factor for low performing schools, with poverty concentration evident in both urban and rural locations, but for different reasons. Location was also significant in understanding different choice patterns across groups. It is hypothesized that small scale studies which sample from specific locations might still be useful for building theory, but will not always capture the multiple factors and patterns operating across multiple sites located in different education districts. This was clearly evident in the study of continuous assessment where there was significant variation in practice across sites.

Significance
Given the variations due to the multicultural nature of societies and historical pattern of uneven development, using mixed methodology appears to limit the weaknesses evident when small samples are used.
 

Author

• Jerome De Lisle, University of the West Indies